Model v. Model
This text of 472 So. 2d 867 (Model v. Model) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Subsequent to a final judgment of divorce, each of the parties petitioned the court for various forms of relief. The matter was referred to a general master. After a hearing on the several matters, the general master resigned before rendering a report. He thereafter signed what purported to be a general master report containing findings of fact and recommendations. Following the filing of exceptions, the trial court modified the recommendations of the master without a record before it.1 An appeal and a cross appeal had been [868]*868filed to these orders. The action of the former general master in signing and filing what purported to be a report subsequent to his resignation was a nullity. See and compare Silvern v. Silvern, 252 So.2d 865 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971); Heerdegen v. Loreck, 17 App.Div. 515, 45 N.Y.S. 585 (1897); Anno. 22 A.L.R.3d 922, 939 § 4(a); Anno. 70 A.L.R.3d 1079, 1097 § 11.
Therefore the trial court’s orders here under review are reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings on the respective parties pending motions.
Reversed and remanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
472 So. 2d 867, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1738, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 14998, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/model-v-model-fladistctapp-1985.